The Bodily Resurrection

Introduction

Jude 3 “Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.”

One of my purposes in going through the fundamentals of the faith is to help us know why we believe what we believe, but also be able to defend it against the attacks of Liberalism. Some things we take for granted as matter of fact like the resurrection. I think we could even point to a couple bible verses that prove the bodily resurrection of Jesus, but we aren’t as exposed to attacks against what we believe. But our kids will be, friends we may have in the world might be. But according to Jude, we are to be earnestly contending or defending the faith against those who are teaching a false gospel.

Men like Marcus Borg of the Jesus Seminar a graduate of Union Theological Seminary (the same one we have mentioned in the past ) who taught religion at Oregon State University and Berkley are saying things like this:

“I do believe in the resurrection of Jesus. I’m just skeptical that it involved anything happening to his corpse…

The truth of Easter really has nothing to do with whether the tomb was empty on a particular morning 2,000 years ago or whether anything happened to the corpse of Jesus.

I see the truth of Easter as grounded in the Christian experience of Jesus as a living spiritual reality of the present.” - Marcus Borg

Liberal theologians would like us to allow for a variety of opinions on this issue and accuse us of being Gate-keepers of Christianity. Episcopal priest Broderick Greer argues

They’re {the creeds} spacious enough to accommodate those who believe in a literal bodily resurrection and those who don’t.

The verbiage simply says we believe Jesus was raised and that we believe in a resurrection, but no particulars are spelled out.

So what is the big deal with believing in the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. I want us to look at 1 Cor 15 for an answer to that question.

vs 14 our preaching is in vain- I still am baffled as to why there are preachers who do not even believe the bible that they preach. Our message becomes worthless if Jesus did not rise from the dead.

vs 13 their faith is vain- how do you trust a God and a bible that lies to you?

vs 14 all preachers are liars

vs 17 you are still in your sins- Liberalism fails to deal with sin largely because liberalism fails to believe in judgment for sin, but Paul’s conclusion is that we are still accountable for our sins if Jesus did not rise from the dead.

vs 18 all dead Christians have died and gone to hell

vs 19 living the Christian life is a miserable existence without the resurrection

So we see how important our belief in the resurrection actually is to our Christian faith. It is not a doctrine that we can agree to disagree about because it is the core of our faith. Tonight, we are going to look at the scriptural evidence for the bodily resurrection of Jesus and then we will deal with one argument against the bodily resurrection that liberals propose. I have rebuttals for two other arguments that they give so if you would like a copy of those notes please come see me after the service.

Evidence for a bodily Resurrection

Each of the four gospels give us accounts of the resurrection of Jesus Christ because it is the capstone they have been building towards. In Matthew, he records

Matthew 28:9 “And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.” The disciples rush to Jesus and throw themselves at his feet holding on. But clearly Jesus had feet to hold on to. Again the liberal doesn’t think a body came out of that tomb so it wouldn’t matter to them what the text says, but the hands and feet are evidence Jesus gives to a bodily resurrection. Let’s look at Luke’s account.

Luke 24:37–39 “But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.” Here Jesus even says “I am not a spirit” a spirit does not have flesh and blood as ye see me have.

Later to Thomas Jesus says in John 20:27 “Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.” Thomas the skeptic refuses to believe in a resurrection merely because the other disciples tell him so. He needs empirical evidence. Jesus clearly thinks that touching his hands and feet and side were enough evidence to prove a bodily resurrection.

Back in Luke 24:42–43 “And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them.” Jesus eats in front of them evidencing that he did indeed have a physical body that could eat physical food.

Liberal Argument

As I said I am only going to deal with one central argument that liberals propose against a belief in a bodily resurrection but there are atleast two others that could be handled more easily.

The claim made by liberal theologians is that according to 1 Corinthians 15:44 “It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.” it is a spiritual body. 1 Corinthians 15:50 “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.” Jesus resurrection body was composed of spirit and not an actual body.

Bart Erhman who I have referenced in the past because he is an ex-evangelical turned atheist says that in these two passages

“The contrast is between bodies constituted by vulgar matter and those made of sublime matter”

Liberals conclude that because Jesus did not have a physical body in the resurrection we should just focus on having a mystical experience of the spirit of Jesus. To the liberal there was no empty tomb, there was no body coming out of the tomb, there was no body going up to heaven, but the spirit of Jesus left his body there. So we should have a spiritual relationship with Him.

The argument goes that Jesus resurrected body was not physical, but purely spiritual and that this is reinforced by the passage which says that flesh and blood do not inherit the kingdom of God; so Jesus couldn’t have had a physical body. So is there substance to their argument. Let’s consider what the scripture says about spiritual bodies. Here are six points to consider when thinking about the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Spiritual food and drink had physical form

Spiritual people still inhabit physical bodies

The resurrection includes the quickening of our physical bodies.

The phrase flesh and blood is an idiom

The analogy of sowing and reaping implies a similarity in the bodies

We await the redemption of our bodies not our spirits.

Spiritual food and drink had physical form 1 Corinthians 10:3–4 “And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.” This passage refers to the manna and the water that were miraculously provided for the children of Israel in the wilderness. It is called spiritual because it was supernatural. It wasn’t like normal food and water and yet it had physical form, it was still eaten and digested. So the distinction between spiritual and physical is not inherent.

Spiritual people still inhabit physical bodies 1 Corinthians 2:14–15 “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.” which leads to us having the mind of Christ so being spiritual means being like Christ while still inhabiting a body here vs 16. We see men and women who are oriented towards God in their thinking, feeling and behavior living out spiritual lives while in a physical body. The fact of the matter is that God created us embodied spirits. This is what God always intended mankind to be.

Romans 8:11 “But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.” The resurrection isn’t merely about raising up spirits; rather the Holy Spirit will quicken which means to make alive our mortal bodies. 1 Cor 15 is all about the resurrection of Jesus which is in some way similar to our resurrection. We rise physically as did Jesus Christ.

According to Craig Keener, flesh and blood was a common figure of speech to refer to mortals. We see this fact in many passages of scripture even. Consider Matthew 16:16–17 “And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.” Jesus was saying no human being has made this known to you, but God has. So the phrase is an idiom referring to humanity.

when you look at 1 Cor 15:50, you will notice that that isn’t the end of the verse. The phrase goes on to use synonymous parallelism flesh and blood= corruption so what it is saying is that perishable humanity does not inherit the kingdom of God. While we will be raised physically, our bodies will be changed to be imperishable. They will be glorified bodies.

The whole analogy of sowing and reaping implies that what comes up is similar to what was sown. 1 Cor 15:42-44.

Redemption of our bodies Romans 8:20–23 “For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.” If our bodies are to be left behind, then how are they redeemed. It doesn’t say spirits but bodies. The whole context of this passage is that the physical created world will participate in this final redemption some day.

The liberals try to make a contrast between the words natural and spiritual but they forget the words body in their argument. It isn’t an argument of whether we will be physical or spiritual but whether we will have perishable, decaying bodies or imperishable glorified bodies.

Conclusion

So can’t we just agree to disagree on this issue? Is it the same thing if we believe Jesus merely rose as a spirit and not as a body? I think we have shown that it does dramatically influence our faith if Jesus came out of the tomb physically or not. It also speaks about our resurrection. What will heaven be like for us when we go through the resurrection? Because in some way, our resurrection is tied to that of Jesus Christ.

So here is my challenge for you tonight: don’t let academic scholars make you feel like you have this simple little faith that takes the word of God for what it says. Men may deny a bodily resurrection because they cannot handle a miracle in the bible, but there is plenty of reason to believe Jesus did indeed rise from the dead bodily. Men like Bart Ehrman want to overthrow your faith piece by piece by making up arguments that just aren’t true. There are answers out there if you are willing to listen to them.

Extra points

The bodily resurrection is just a creation of modern day fundamentalists-

Jesus Christ Himself- John 2:19–21 “Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body.”

Clement of Alexandria AD 150 Let none of you say that this flesh is not judged and does not rise again. Just think: In what state were you saved, and in what state did you recover your [spiritual] sight, if not in the flesh? In the same manner, as you were called in the flesh, so you shall come in the flesh. If Christ, the Lord who saved us, though he was originally spirit, became flesh and in this state called us, so also shall we receive our reward in the flesh”

Justin Martyr AD 151 The prophets have proclaimed his [Christ’s] two comings. One, indeed, which has already taken place, was that of a dishonored and suffering man. The second will take place when, in accord with prophecy, he shall come from the heavens in glory with his angelic host, when he shall raise the bodies of all the men who ever lived. Then he will clothe the worthy in immortality, but the wicked, clothed in eternal sensibility, he will commit to the eternal fire along with the evil demons

2. The ending of Mark does not record the actual resurrection because it ends with vs 8.

a. Not all textual critics are agreed that Mark should end here. See arguments by James Snapp Jr.

b. The text itself leads us to believe it shouldn’t end here- Verse 8 ends with the women running in fear which would be a very anticlimactic end to a book that has spent a lot of time building up the importance of women in the kingdom.

c. Are we to ignore the other gospel records merely because Mark possibly might not record the actual resurrection?

d. Vs 6 announces the resurrection even if it does tell the details of the resurrection appearances.